The sense of meaninglessness in bureaucratized science.

Looking at scientists (in the life sciences), we focus on the sense of meaninglessness associated with bureaucratization. We define the sense of meaninglessness as a perception of meaning deficit or meaning conflict in particular situations that can be associated with frustration, irritation, and/or boredom. We show that it can be caused by identity disturbance - particularly the incongruence between the ideal self as a researcher and the imposed self as a bureaucrat. We claim that the sense of meaninglessness is more likely to emerge in those activities that are further from an individual's core identity, and more identity work is needed to make them meaningful. We also claim that processes of rationalization imposed by external agendas, particularly transitions from substantive to formal rationality (predictability, control and calculability, efficiency) contribute to the proliferation of meaninglessness in academia. The sense of meaninglessness is, therefore, ignited by the external forces colonizing academic life and constitutes an instance of the 'irrationality of rationality'. It is an outcome or side effect of the collision between two incompatible logics of practice: bureaucratic and scientific. To show the incongruence of those competing logics, we analyze the data derived from a mixed-method study conducted between 2013 and 2014 among beneficiaries of an international research grant project. As a supplementary source of reference, we use our research on academic boredom and laboratory scientists' work and careers.

Strengthen oversight of risky research on pathogens.

Policy reset and convergence on governance are needed.

Pushing partnerships: corporate influence on research and policy via the International Life Sciences Institute.

OBJECTIVE: There are concerns that some non-profit organisations, financed by the food industry, promote industry positions in research and policy materials. Using Freedom of Information (FOI) requests, we test the proposition that the International Life Sciences Institute (ILSI), one prominent non-for profit in international health and nutrition research, promotes industry positions. DESIGN: U.S. Right to Know filed five FOI from 2015 to 2018 covering communications with researchers at four US institutions: Texas A&M, University of Illinois, University of Colorado and North Carolina State University. It received 15 078 pages, which were uploaded to the University of California San Francisco's Industry Documents Library. We searched the Library exploring it thematically for instances of: (1) funding research activity that supports industry interests; (2) publishing and promoting industry-sponsored positions or literature; (3) disseminating favourable material to decision makers and the public and (4) suppressing views that do not support industry. RESULTS: Available emails confirmed that ILSI's funding by corporate entities leads to industry influence over some of ILSI activities. Emails reveal a pattern of activity in which ILSI sought to exploit the credibility of scientists and academics to bolster industry positions and promote industry-devised content in its meetings, journal and other activities. ILSI also actively seeks to marginalise unfavourable positions. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that undue influence of industry through third-party entities like ILSI requires enhanced management of conflicts of interest by researchers. We call for ILSI to be recognised as a private sector entity rather than an independent scientific non-profit, to allow for more appropriate appraisal of its outputs and those it funds.

The European Bioinformatics Institute in 2020: building a global infrastructure of interconnected data resources for the life sciences.

Data resources at the European Bioinformatics Institute (EMBL-EBI, https://www.ebi.ac.uk/) archive, organize and provide added-value analysis of research data produced around the world. This year's update for EMBL-EBI focuses on data exchanges among resources, both within the institute and with a wider global infrastructure. Within EMBL-EBI, data resources exchange data through a rich network of data flows mediated by automated systems. This network ensures that users are served with as much information as possible from any search and any starting point within EMBL-EBI's websites. EMBL-EBI data resources also exchange data with hundreds of other data resources worldwide and collectively are a key component of a global infrastructure of interconnected life sciences data resources. We also describe the BioImage Archive, a deposition database for raw images derived from primary research that will supply data for future knowledgebases that will add value through curation of primary image data. We also report a new release of the PRIDE database with an improved technical infrastructure, a new API, a new webpage, and improved data exchange with UniProt and Expression Atlas. Training is a core mission of EMBL-EBI and in 2018 our training team served more users, both in-person and through web-based programmes, than ever before.

[On the 10th Anniversary of the Establishment of the Department of Immunology (A Letter of the Compiling Editor)].

This special issue of the journal is dedicated to the tenth anniversary of the Department of Immunology, Faculty of Biology, Moscow State University and describes some of the results of its work. Most of the materials were prepared by young graduates and post-graduate students of the department.

A single, open access journal may prevent the primary publishing problems in the life sciences.

Herein, we discuss a novel way to knit current life sciences publishing structures together under the scope of a single life science journal that would countermand many of the issues faced in current publishing paradigms. Such issues include, but are not limited to, publication fees, subscription fees, impact factor, and publishing in more "glamorous" journals for career health. We envision a process flow involving (i) a single, overall, life sciences journal, (ii) divided into sections headed by learned societies, (iii) to whom all scientific papers are submitted for peer review, and (iv) all accepted scientific literature would be published open access and without author publication fees. With such a structure, journal fees, the merit system of science, and unethical aspects of open access would be reformed for the better. Importantly, such a journal could leverage existing online platforms; that is to say, it is conceptually feasible. We conclude that wholly inclusive publishing paradigms can be possible. A single, open access, online, life sciences journal could solve the myriad problems associated with current publishing paradigms and would be feasible to implement.

Biological approaches to public administration and public policy Introduction.

This special issue considers the relationship of the life sciences to both public policy and public administration. This makes sense because the bureaucratic process and public administration are deeply involved in the policy process and the development of substantive public policy. The two subjects are intertwined. And a biological perspective can illuminate many aspects of both. That is the focus of this issue.

Darwin's bureaucrat Reassessing the microfoundations of bureaucracy scholarship.

The study of bureaucratic behavior-focusing on control, decision-making, and institutional arrangements-has historically leaned heavily on theories of rational choice and bounded rationality. Notably absent from this research, however, is attention to the growing literature on biological and especially evolutionary human behavior. This article addresses this gap by closely examining the extant economic and psychological frameworks-which we refer to as "Adam Smith's bureaucrat" and "Herbert Simon's bureaucrat"-for their shortcomings in terms of explanatory and predictive theory, and by positing a different framework, which we call "Charles Darwin's bureaucrat." This model incorporates new insights from an expanding multidisciplinary research framework and has the potential to address some of the long-noted weaknesses of classic theories of bureaucratic behavior.

Torturing science Science, interrogational torture, and public policy.

Contrary to the claims of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) that its torture program was scientific, the program was not based on biology or any other science. Instead, the George W. Bush administration veneered the program's justification with a patina of pseudoscience, ignoring the actual biology of torturing human brains. We reconstruct the Bush administration's decision-making process to establish that the policy decision to use torture took place in the immediate aftermath of the 9/11 attacks without any investigation into its efficacy. We then present the pseudoscientific model of torture sold to the CIA, show why this ad hoc model amounted to pseudoscience, and then catalog what the actual science of torturing human brains-available in 2001-reveals about the practice. We conclude with a discussion of how a process incorporating countervailing evidence might prevent a policy going forward that is contrary to law, ethics, and evidence.

The UK's Life Sciences Strategy: opportunities for clinical pharmacology.

The UK's Life Sciences Strategy provides UK clinical pharmacologists with a unique opportunity to enhance the impact of their discipline on patients and the NHS as well as the pharmaceutical industry. The full benefits of electronic prescribing systems, supported by artificial intelligence, will require clinical pharmacological expertise. Similarly, the Strategy's support for 'healthy ageing' will only be realized if clinical pharmacologists are able to use their expertise in promoting the safe and effective use of medicines in older people. Furthermore, their needs to be an active - and continuing - collaboration between clinical pharmacologists in the NHS and the pharmaceutical industry in general as well as with the discipline of pharmaceutical medicine.